Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1967274)

I don't think the company would have ever wanted it to be restricted to in category only OE can be pulled. You look at my category and you see that the oe for all 4 bases and primarily done out of here. Why would they want to chance us being bought off like we are now, negates the whole reason for demanding this paragraph.

And I know line 6, which is untouched from the current PWA was what Slow said was where the in category requirement came from. But line 6 is line 6, line X is not a subparagraph of 6. And line 6 had to specificy that it was category , line X is missing that specific term... for a reason.

Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog (Post 1967287)

You're wrong. Admit it and move on. The MEC negotiated the restriction in place specifically to limit the amount of OE trips pulled. You would have been treated no differently in the situation you describe than you are now--except you'd be making 8% more.

Originally Posted by lineplug (Post 1967296)

Rocky

Please state your source on this. When did the MEC negotiate this?

Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog (Post 1967305)

C2015 road shows. They negotiated it as part of the agreement related to OE trip pulls to LIMIT the number of trips pulled. It's in the road show slides (slide 91) too.

https://https://dal.alpa.org/DesktopModules/Bring2mind/DMX/Download.aspx?Command=Core_Download&EntryId=8016&l anguage=en-US&PortalId=0&TabId=2593

Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog (Post 1967287)

You're wrong. Admit it and move on. The MEC negotiated the restriction in place specifically to limit the amount of OE trips pulled. You would have been treated no differently in the situation you describe than you are now--except you'd be making 8% more.

Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog (Post 1967287)

You're wrong. Admit it and move on. The MEC negotiated the restriction in place specifically to limit the amount of OE trips pulled. You would have been treated no differently in the situation you describe than you are now--except you'd be making 8% more.

Originally Posted by notEnuf (Post 1964967)

I love the "we got the A350-900 up to B777-200 rates." Its exactly the same size airplane. If you can't improve the rates on an equal size more efficient airplane, then I guess you say status quo is an accomplishment.

Originally Posted by lineplug (Post 1967323)

Rocky

I see where it was in the DALPA slides but I can't find it in the TA language so where is the legally binding document that spells out the limitation? Are you assuming there was a side agreement or was there some communication from DALPA that referenced it?

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1967332)

Admit it, it's not in the contract so it doesn't mean ****.

BTW, I live well on what I make now. There are not only work rule issues but scope issues as well. The TA was a disaster. Admit it and move on.

Originally Posted by RockyMtMadDog (Post 1967440)

There are many contractually enforceable items that are not in the TA. At the road shows, the Negotiating Committee referenced the contractually binding letter that limited the OE pulls to in-base OEs. Don't believe me. Call Contract Admin or your own reps. Ask them if it's routine to have these types of agreements.

It's unfortunate that guys here wish to rewrite the history of this agreement.